Side by side
Consultation participation and their own register declarations, side by side. Counts, not judgments — participation is not influence.
Counts here are a floor, never a total: they cover the 583 consultation files tracked so far (42,224 submissions, mostly 2025–26), so an organization's real filing history is larger, not smaller.
NGO · Czechia
Declared costs: not declared · in the register since 2009
Environmental organization · Belgium
Declared costs: not declared · in the register since 2009
Monitoring, reporting and verification of greenhouse gas emissions from maritime transport · EU implementation of the Aarhus Convention in the area of access to justice in environmental matters
Register facts self-declared (snapshot 2 Sept 2026); cost bands are floors. Shared files are shared attention, not evidence of coordination.
Their opening passages on the files they share, verbatim and in filing order. We do not summarize, compare, or characterize positions — read them at source.
European Environmental Bureau · filed 26 Nov 2020 · source
The climate and energy framework regulatory overhaul to step up 2030 climate is a unique opportunity to improve policy coherence and address the existing loopholes. The EU ETS is an important driver of decarbonisation but it needs to be strengthened and cannot work alone. The market mechanism must be reinforced and go in hand with a stronger regulatory approach and by no means replace it.
Frank Bold Society · filed 8 Nov 2021 · source
Frank Bold Society welcomes the opportunity to comment on the proposal of the revised ETS Directive. Please find attached our analysis on ETS revenues use (Art. 10(3) of the Directive) - current practice in the Czech Republic. The main outcomes of the analysis are: - FBS welcomes the revision draft of the ETS Directive, which suggests that 100 % of ETS revenues should be used for environmental measures.
Frank Bold Society · filed 4 Jun 2018 · source
Amendment of the Aarhus Regulation (AR) is the most suitable means for the EU legislature to bring EU in compliance with its obligations under article 9(3) of the Aarhus Convention. The ACCC found EU to be in violation of the Convention by failing to provide members of the public with access to the EU courts to challenge acts and omissions of the EU bodies relating to the environment.
European Environmental Bureau · filed 5 Jun 2018 · source
Context: The description of the context is broadly accurate, though it fails to mention that the reason that no agreement was reached at the MoP was because the EU opposed the endorsement of the finding of non-compliance (thereby breaking the longstanding practice whereby all findings of non-compliance had previously been endorsed by the MoP with the full support of the EU) but failed to get even a single other…
2 organizations on one sheet: every file each filed on, their register declarations, and a working link to each submission. Free: we ask for your name and email, and PolicySpeak may contact you about the product (privacy policy). The per-file record stays downloadable without signing up on each file’s page.